Proof-of-Citizenship Ruling Victory for Honest Vote

[Texashiker]

No, I understand it perfectly well. You're just refusing to answer a simple question. Go ahead and try again.

You are bringing no valid arguments to the table.

Lets take your example and say the person you described above DID have a valid drivers license, I fail to see how ANYTHING you stated above would change.

I am not trying to be rude, but have you ever been served with court papers? Maybe being sued for child support, maybe a summoned to court for a child support review?

When you are served with papers, chances are the person doing the serving will have a photocopy of drivers license or state ID with your picture on it. The last time I was served with court papers the constable had a photocopy of my drivers license.

Having an up-to-date ID allows the state to find you.

Not having an up-to-date ID allows you to hide from the state.

All of those people complaining about not wanting a state ID, what are they hiding from? Are they upstanding members of society, or are they behind on child support and trying to hide?

 

[MixMasterTang]

You are bringing no valid arguments to the table.




I am not trying to be rude, but have you ever been served with court papers? Maybe being sued for child support, maybe a summoned to court for a child support review?

When you are served with papers, chances are the person doing the serving will have a photocopy of drivers license or state ID with your picture on it. The last time I was served with court papers the constable had a photocopy of my drivers license.

Having an up-to-date ID allows the state to find you.

Not having an up-to-date ID allows you to hide from the state.

All of those people complaining about not wanting a state ID, what are they hiding from? Are they upstanding members of society, or are they behind on child support and trying to hide?

No I have never been served papers, but again you said the guy moved to a different state and started working at a different job. So please tell me again if he flew off to Hawaii and his ex-wife and kids were in Florida what stops him from getting a VALID Hawaiian drivers license and still do the exact things you mentioned?

 

[thraashman]

You are bringing no valid arguments to the table.




I am not trying to be rude, but have you ever been served with court papers? Maybe being sued for child support, maybe a summoned to court for a child support review?

When you are served with papers, chances are the person doing the serving will have a photocopy of drivers license or state ID with your picture on it. The last time I was served with court papers the constable had a photocopy of my drivers license.

Having an up-to-date ID allows the state to find you.

Not having an up-to-date ID allows you to hide from the state.

All of those people complaining about not wanting a state ID, what are they hiding from? Are they upstanding members of society, or are they behind on child support and trying to hide?

You realized that's the EXACT same argument as "I don't care about warrantless wiretapping, I have nothing to hide".

 

[Texashiker]

No I have never been served papers,

Thank you for being honest.

but again you said the guy moved to a different state and started working at a different job. So please tell me again if he flew off to Hawaii and his ex-wife and kids were in Florida what stops him from getting a VALID Hawaiian drivers license and still do the exact things you mentioned?

He lived in Orange Texas (southeast Texas) worked in southwest Louisiana. It was like a 15 - 30 minute drive for him.

You realized that's the EXACT same argument as "I don't care about warrantless wiretapping, I have nothing to hide".

You have a civic duty to serve on a jury, which usually goes along with getting a state issued ID.

You have no duty to hand over your private communications to the state.

 

[boomerang]

78% Favor Proof of Citizenship Before Being Allowed to Vote

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 78% of Likely U.S. Voters believe everyone should be required to prove his or her citizenship before being allowed to register to vote. That’s up from 71% a year ago. Just 19% oppose that requirement. (To see survey question wording, click here.)


Twenty-nine percent (29%) believe laws that require proof of citizenship before allowing voter registration discriminate against such voters. But more than twice as many (61%) say such laws do not discriminate, up three points from 58% who felt that way in March of last year. Ten percent (10%) are undecided.

The position of the rabid leftists here are the opinions of the minority and as such, there is no need to entertain their arguments. They are on the wrong side of the issue.

 

[IronWing]

78% Favor Proof of Citizenship Before Being Allowed to Vote



The position of the rabid leftists here are the opinions of the minority and as such, there is no need to entertain their arguments. They are on the wrong side of the issue.

Your post has nothing to do with 1) your original post nor 2) the rantings of Tom Horne. Hopefully this means you have conceded that there ws no basis for the statements made in the original post.

 

[boomerang]

Your post has nothing to do with 1) your original post nor 2) the rantings of Tom Horne. Hopefully this means you have conceded that there ws no basis for the statements made in the original post.

While you do draw interesting conclusions, they have no relevance for me.

The thread has for some time not had anything to do with the original post. Regardless, it is my thread and even if it wasn't, I could post a chocolate cookie recipe in it if I desired. In other words, you may dictate to me that which you wish to appear here, but I am not required to listen.

Regarding your second point, I will reiterate that you can take it up with the Judge or Mr. Horne. In my OP, I put no words in their mouths, I only quoted their own words.

You cannot control the discourse within or the direction of this forum, this thread, the articles posted, the comments I make. Get happy with it or don't. It makes no difference to me.

 

[her209]

You realized that's the EXACT same argument as "I don't care about warrantless wiretapping, I have nothing to hide".

Why do gun owners not want to register their guns? What are they hiding?

:sneaky:

 

[IronWing]

While you do draw interesting conclusions, they have no relevance for me.

The thread has for some time not had anything to do with the original post. Regardless, it is my thread and even if it wasn't, I could post a chocolate cookie recipe in it if I desired. In other words, you may dictate to me that which you wish to appear here, but I am not required to listen.

Regarding your second point, I will reiterate that you can take it up with the Judge or Mr. Horne. In my OP, I put no words in their mouths, I only quoted their own words.

You cannot control the discourse within or the direction of this forum, this thread, the articles posted, the comments I make. Get happy with it or don't. It makes no difference to me.

I graciously accept your concession.

 

[Paratus]

I graciously accept your concession.

He sure pussed out didn't he.

 

[shira]

I want the righties in this thread to answer a simple question honestly and without evasion. And - as a liberal - I'll start things off by doing the same thing. Here are two hypotheticals related to voter ID fraud and voter suppression:

Suppose it were possible to look into a crystal ball and accurately see the effect of putting in place a stringent voter ID law for elections as compared to the effect of NOT putting in place any voter ID law for elections. Imagine two possible outcomes:

A: The crystal ball tells us that the number of fraudulent votes prevented by the ID law would be at least as great as the number of votes suppressed by the ID law.

B: The crystal ball tells us that the number of fraudulent votes prevented by the ID law would be a tiny fraction of the number of votes suppressed by the ID law.

Speaking as a liberal, if I had confidence that A were true, then I would support voter ID laws. But if I had confidence that B were true, I would oppose voter ID laws. Lacking confidence in either, but seeing evidence that B is true and zero evidence that A is true, I oppose voter ID laws.

My question to righties is: How would you respond if you had confidence that condition B were true (we already know how you feel about A)?

 

[Greenman]

I want the righties in this thread to answer a simple question honestly and without evasion. And - as a liberal - I'll start things off by doing the same thing. Here are two hypotheticals related to voter ID fraud and voter suppression:

Suppose it were possible to look into a crystal ball and accurately see the effect of putting in place a stringent voter ID law for elections as compared to the effect of NOT putting in place any voter ID law for elections. Imagine two possible outcomes:

A: The crystal ball tells us that the number of fraudulent votes prevented by the ID law would be at least as great as the number of votes suppressed by the ID law.

B: The crystal ball tells us that the number of fraudulent votes prevented by the ID law would be a tiny fraction of the number of votes suppressed by the ID law.

Speaking as a liberal, if I had confidence that A were true, then I would support voter ID laws. But if I had confidence that B were true, I would oppose voter ID laws. Lacking confidence in either, but seeing evidence that B is true and zero evidence that A is true, I oppose voter ID laws.

My question to righties is: How would you respond if you had confidence that condition B were true (we already know how you feel about A)?

I would oppose voter id laws if b were true. But the question meaningless, B can't be true.

 

[Zaap]

The idea that requiring an ID is leading to repressed votimg is a bullshit premise to begin with. How can one honestly answer a.question based on a completely false premise?

It's not particularly difficult or expensive for a citizen to get a valid ID in this country.

Meanwhile, our own government works hard every day to undermine and tear down our already tatttered immigration system to the point no one even knows who is even entering the country, let alone what each is doing here with zero clue what untold millions will do in the future. (Something no other country on the planet does, by the way).

Pretending legal citizens having valid IDs is a hardship when it isn't, while simultaneously undermining an effective immigration system are two things that don't work together. Its the equivalent of setting up a system of online voting (which would be a decent goal) but then working at it to see that no effective security measure is in place to know who has access to it.

Want ID- free voting that will remain uncorrupted? Then get a handle on immigration and have an accurate grasp on who is entering your country and for what purpose and for how long. That's not radical- every country on earth does just that... except increasingly the US because people have been conned into thinking common sense is evil.

 

[boomerang]

The idea that requiring an ID is leading to repressed votimg is a bullshit premise to begin with. How can one honestly answer a.question based on a completely false premise?

Pretty much this. As I said earlier, the left provides no proof of voter suppression. We must accept their "feelings" on the matter in a show of blind faith. And then we're asked to provide answers based on that assumption? It's nonsensical.

So I would pose a question to those that are opposed to ID being involved in the voting process. How many citizens of the U.S. that are of voting age do not have a form of government issued ID? A simple question that should be able to be answered easily.

 

[Bowfinger]

I would oppose voter id laws if b were true. But the question meaningless, B can't be true.

Yet B is absolutely true. Data show there are millions of perfectly eligible American voters who do not have the current, state-issued, photo IDs required by these voter suppression laws. That is a simple fact, no matter how unintuitive it may seem.

 

[Bowfinger]

Pretty much this. As I said earlier, the left provides no proof of voter suppression.

You're lying again. The proof has been presented again and again. You ignore it because it doesn't fit your agenda.

We must accept their "feelings" on the matter in a show of blind faith.

Hypocrite, much? It is you who continues to bleat about in-person voter fraud solely on blind faith, without evidence to support it.

And then we're asked to provide answers based on that assumption? It's nonsensical.

It's nonsensical only to those incapable of independent thought.

So I would pose a question to those that are opposed to ID being involved in the voting process. How many citizens of the U.S. that are of voting age do not have a form of government issued ID? A simple question that should be able to be answered easily.

Millions, as has been documented in some of the suits against the suppression laws (and linked in earlier threads here). Also be clear that not just any government ID is acceptable under these laws. It must be a current, state-issued, photo ID, e.g., a non-expired drivers license or passport. Other forms of ID, even if issued by the government, are not good enough. (Specific requirements vary by state.)

 

[Paratus]

Yet B is absolutely true. Data show there are millions of perfectly eligible American voters who do not have the current, state-issued, photo IDs required by these voter suppression laws. That is a simple fact, no matter how unintuitive it may seem.

To your average righty if it's not intuitive it's not possible because thinking is hard.

Besides if it was easy for them, and we are equal it's therefore easy for everyone. If it's not easy for you, you are lying and a bad person and shouldn't vote.

 

[boomerang]

Also be clear that not just any government ID is acceptable under these laws. It must be a current, state-issued, photo ID, e.g., a non-expired drivers license or passport. Other forms of ID, even if issued by the government, are not good enough. (Specific requirements vary by state.)

Are you intentionally lying or are you just ignorant of the reality surrounding ID requirements and you're bloviating?

Posts like this are why I will never take you seriously. You present what you say as the gospel when it's bullshit. Oh yeah, I see you hedged right at the end but your post is still bullshit. You make a blanket statement that may or may not be true and hedge in the wrap-up.

Show me where anything is said about current ID in the quotes below. I question myself why I even reply to posts from people that stretch and massage the truth to fit their agenda.

Here are the requirements for registering to vote in Michigan from an ID perspective.

http://www.mi.gov/sos/0,4670,7-127-29836-182656--F,00.html

[FONT=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]

[FONT=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]What kind of identification do I need to show to register to vote?[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=arial, helvetica, sans-serif]Answer:[/FONT] [FONT=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]If you hand-deliver your application, the staff person helping you will take your form and ask you to provide photo identification. If you do not have an acceptable form of photo identification, you will be asked to sign an Affidavit of Voter not in Possession of Picture Identification.
If you have never registered to vote in Michigan and choose to mail in your application, you will need to meet an identification requirement. This means you must:

• Enter your driver's license number or personal identification card number where requested on the form, or
• Send a copy of one of the following forms of identification with your application:
  • A photocopy of your driver's license or personal ID card, or
  • A photocopy of a paycheck stub, utility bill, bank document or government document that lists both your name and your address.
• OR if you are unable to fulfill this requirement at the time of registration, you may provide one of the above items at the polls on election day to complete the process.

NEVER SEND AN ORIGINAL DOCUMENT!
If you have never voted in Michigan and choose to submit the form by mail or through a third party, such as at a voter registration drive, you must appear in person to vote in the first election in which you wish to participate. This requirement does not apply if:

1. You personally hand-deliver the form to your county, city or township clerk's office instead of mailing the form, or
2. You are 60 years of age or more, or
3. You are disabled, or
4. You are eligible to vote under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act.

[/SIZE][/FONT]

[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]Here are the requirements to actually vote.

http://www.mi.gov/sos/0,4670,7-127-29836-182649--F,00.html

[FONT=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]

[FONT=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]What is the Voter ID requirement?[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=arial, helvetica, sans-serif]Answer:[/FONT] [FONT=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]When you go to the polls to cast a ballot, you will be asked to produce photo identification. The requirements are the result of a 1996 law determined to be enforceable by the Michigan Supreme Court in 2007.
The following types of photo ID are acceptable:

• Michigan driver's license or state-issued ID card
• Driver's license or personal identification card issued by another state
• Federal or state government-issued photo identification
• U.S. passport
• Military ID with photo
• Student identification with photo from a high school or accredited institution of higher learning
• Tribal identification card with photo

The ID does not need your address. If you do not have photo ID or do not bring it with you to the polls, you may still vote. Simply sign an affidavit stating that you are not in possession of photo identification. Your ballot is included with all others and is counted on Election Day.
[/SIZE][/FONT]

[/SIZE][/FONT]
[/SIZE][/FONT]

 

[unixwizzard]

All this talk about so-called voter suppression..

Why isn't anything being done about the millions who don't bother voting? I mean if voting is such a sacred right, why don't more people vote?

I know quite a few people who are rabid anti voter ID.. they actively lobby against voter ID, and will travel to wherever in order to attend meetings or hold a protest. All but one of these people do not vote. Oh they all have their lame excuses. They are just that, excuses not valid reasons.

If I had my way, I would require everybody of voting age to vote, and if they don't vote, after so many election cycles of not voting then they lose their right to vote.

We only get the government we vote for. As an example many in my city are not happy with the Mayor. I don't care for him myself but every time I hear someone complaining, I ask if they voted in that election. Chances are they didn't. Out of some 60K eligible voters, less than 8,000 bothered to vote for a mayor.

As for the voter ID itself, I don't have a problem with it in principal. If the citizens of a state want it, and vote for it, then it should happen. I do think if they do it, then the process of getting proper photo ID should be made easier. Here in PA as in many other states, one has to go through the DMV to get a State ID. In most counties there are one, maybe two driver's license centers, and the hours they are open usually make it impossible for a person who works during the day to get out there. They should open up photo ID centers in post office branches, better yet open them up at Walmart, lord knows there are plenty of those around.

tl;dr More people need to vote, pox on your house if you don't vote. If people want Voter ID then make getting the ID easy and cheap.

 

[Greenman]

Yet B is absolutely true. Data show there are millions of perfectly eligible American voters who do not have the current, state-issued, photo IDs required by these voter suppression laws. That is a simple fact, no matter how unintuitive it may seem.

Produce said data please.

 

[Greenman]

All this talk about so-called voter suppression..

Why isn't anything being done about the millions who don't bother voting? I mean if voting is such a sacred right, why don't more people vote?

I know quite a few people who are rabid anti voter ID.. they actively lobby against voter ID, and will travel to wherever in order to attend meetings or hold a protest. All but one of these people do not vote. Oh they all have their lame excuses. They are just that, excuses not valid reasons.

If I had my way, I would require everybody of voting age to vote, and if they don't vote, after so many election cycles of not voting then they lose their right to vote.

We only get the government we vote for. As an example many in my city are not happy with the Mayor. I don't care for him myself but every time I hear someone complaining, I ask if they voted in that election. Chances are they didn't. Out of some 60K eligible voters, less than 8,000 bothered to vote for a mayor.

As for the voter ID itself, I don't have a problem with it in principal. If the citizens of a state want it, and vote for it, then it should happen. I do think if they do it, then the process of getting proper photo ID should be made easier. Here in PA as in many other states, one has to go through the DMV to get a State ID. In most counties there are one, maybe two driver's license centers, and the hours they are open usually make it impossible for a person who works during the day to get out there. They should open up photo ID centers in post office branches, better yet open them up at Walmart, lord knows there are plenty of those around.

tl;dr More people need to vote, pox on your house if you don't vote. If people want Voter ID then make getting the ID easy and cheap.

I'm an employer, and I can't hire someone without a valid id.

 

[Bowfinger]

Are you intentionally lying or are you just ignorant of the reality surrounding ID requirements and you're bloviating?

Posts like this are why I will never take you seriously. You present what you say as the gospel when it's bullshit. Oh yeah, I see you hedged right at the end but your post is still bullshit. You make a blanket statement that may or may not be true and hedge in the wrap-u[SIZE=-1][FONT=arial, helvetica, sans-serif]p. ...[/FONT][/SIZE]

We know you are not very bright and seriously lacking in integrity, but this is a low even for you. Did you seriously just try to claim that your one state is somehow representative of all states, and specifically of those states that have enacted the RNC-led voter ID laws? Here's a hint, Sparky. Michigan is one of only 50 states, and not a particularly important one for this discussion. Look at the laws passed by Texas, Pennsylvania, Indiana, and other states challenged in court for their voter suppression laws. That is what sparked this debate.

By the way, my so-called "hedge" is what we grown-ups call being truthful. Every state sets its own requirements. Therefore, one cannot make a blanket assertion that applies to the laws of all 50 states, nor was I trying to. I included my caveat precisely because of this fact, to acknowledge there are substantial differences between states. Some require no in-person identification at all to vote, some have modest ID requirements (including things like utility bills with the voter's name), and some have quite restrictive requirements. Anyone with at least three working neurons understands the voter suppression discussion centers on those states with the most oppressive requirements.

 

[Bowfinger]

Produce said data please.

No. Look it up yourself. I have limited time and frankly no interest in recreating every single piece of all the previous threads. There comes a point where one realizes that those determined to ignore the truth will continue to do so no matter how many times it's presented. If you are sincerely interested, the information is there.

 

[fskimospy]

I'm an employer, and I can't hire someone without a valid id.

What does that have to do with that person's right to vote?

The discussion here is simple: if you want to restrict people's ability to vote you should need to show some evidence that there's a good reason for it. No such evidence has ever showed up.

 

[boomerang]

I'm an employer, and I can't hire someone without a valid id.

Nor could I when I was an employer.